Succinctly put. Decent people lulled into lies so they can struggle on to make ends meet, or escape responsibility. Bad faith wins with gullible consumerism. We've been conditioned, conquered. But it's not "over". A painful awakening is underway, led by angry, miffed philosophers who thought the same. Deep virtue and moral truth rise slowly to the existential threat. Minneapolis -- and a thousand other places -- show the way. They take us steeply uphill on a rocky path consoled by kind hearts, gutsy kindness, rare maturity. The ultimate guardrail shows itself to require the kind of life unperturbed by the requirements of overcoming 10,000 years of capitulation. The salt of the earth tends the ground, takes its lumps, listens to the forever wisdom so cleverly forgotten.
Initial note: Before responding, one thing must be said that Brock does not make explicit but is key to understanding the context: liberal democracy has never been a neutral referee serving everyone. It has always been, to a large extent, the benevolent facade of class struggle and capitalist exploitation.
The institutions Brock calls "the Cathedral" (universities, media, administrative state) did not fall from the sky. They were built to serve concentrated interests, but with the added virtue of doing so hypocritically: they promised equality while delivering exploitation, they promised participation while concentrating power.
This does not justify today's fascism, but it explains why the vacuum Brock diagnoses is not an anomaly but the culmination of a long process. The problem is not that liberal democracy became corrupted. The problem is that it was never as pure as some remember.
That said, here is the response.
---
Shared diagnosis: Brock accurately describes the structure of "actual fascism": Yarvin writes the ideology, Thiel funds it, Vance executes it, and podcasters make it digestible. The legitimacy vacuum was created by liberal institutions themselves (Iraq, 2008, the pandemic). And the institutionalists do not react because recognizing the problem would mean admitting their own complicity.
All of this is true. And it is valuable. Very valuable.
What to add to his article: Brock leaves us with an open question: "The window is closing. What you do now is the record." But he does not specify what concrete actions we can take. Here are three directions that complete his diagnosis without contradicting it:
1. Build popular power from below
The "No Kings" movement and the rejection of ICE show that people do not passively accept the "CEO-government." These movements are not just protests: they are grassroots organization that can translate into electoral power and mass civil disobedience. The institutionalists will not lead this, but they can support it.
2. Democratic control of technology
If automation replaces human labor, the benefits must reach everyone, not just the owners of the machines. This means: universal basic income funded by taxes on AI, common ownership of data, platform cooperatives. This is not utopia: real experiments are already underway.
3. Alliance between movements
The "No Kings" movement is national in the US, but the problem is global. Yarvin-Thiel-Vance have allies in Hungary, Italy, Argentina. We need to coordinate international responses: boycotts, popular sanctions, cross-border mutual aid networks.
---
Conclusion
Brock's article is the best diagnosis of the current power structure I have read. His analysis of the connection between ideology, capital, political execution, and cultural legitimization should be required reading.
But it must be read with a caveat in mind: the liberal democracy Brock seems to want to restore was never fully real. This is not about returning to a center that failed. It is about building something new that does not reproduce the contradictions of the past.
Brock gives us the diagnosis. Now it is up to us, with this caveat in mind, to move to action.
At this point, it feels like all commentary on how history will remember this moment should be prefaced with "if enough records of this time survive", or even "if we survive".
"This is why the institutionalists cannot lead the response to this moment."
And, unfortunately, it appears at this time that major voices for "accountability" - Indivisible, No Kings, and even Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, and Heather Cox Richardson - should probably be counted among the institutionalists.
Getting eight million people to march on a Saturday in March was great (I was, unfortunately, kept indoors by my usual debilitating spring allergies). But really, it accomplished nothing. If you're going to get that many people to march, don't just wave banners and stay inside the lines. Block traffic. March on capital buildings and demand action. Organize a general strike. Not the lame one-day May 1st strike Indivisible is pushing, a real strike - one which ends when Trump is removed from power and he and his lackeys face criminal charges.
Meanwhile, Reich and Krugman keep pushing people to "get out the vote in November", as though those elections will occur (possibly not) and be fair (not a chance). They either won't occur, or the Republicans will throw out votes and refuse to seat Democratic winners. I could, for example, see Johnson refusing to seat any California Representatives on the grounds that the redistricting was "illegal", which would definitely put Congress safely in Republican hands, and that's just one of many tactics available to those who have placed themselves above the law.
Yes. I think it is hard to believe in deadlines when the regime always moves the goal post. Those who want to play with them - as it is profitable for them - before the scream NO NO I did mot mean that.
Windows closed
I wrote a note about how the regimes rules for its population are the same a a dystopian childhood.
I highly recommend Diary of a Man in Despair. It is a journal kept by a German intellectual from 1932-1945 and it changed me to read it. If I didn't know better I would have thought it was written about our current times. Like then the capital class and the journalists went along to get what they could out of it and the moderates in power refused to see what was happening. How he describes the general populace and the fever of nationalism was terrifying based on how toxic our discourse is.
Great job, Mike. Coincidentally, or maybe not so coincidentally, John B. Judis has an almost identical take in Persuasion called What Hegel Knew About Trump-different premise, same exact conclusion. And if by some miracle we escape perdition, and this national/international nightmare finally ends, what's left of the American people should destroy every property with the foul name of 'Trump' affixed to it brick by brick, the same way the French people once destroyed the Bastille. Then we will all salt the ground, and pray...
Succinctly put. Decent people lulled into lies so they can struggle on to make ends meet, or escape responsibility. Bad faith wins with gullible consumerism. We've been conditioned, conquered. But it's not "over". A painful awakening is underway, led by angry, miffed philosophers who thought the same. Deep virtue and moral truth rise slowly to the existential threat. Minneapolis -- and a thousand other places -- show the way. They take us steeply uphill on a rocky path consoled by kind hearts, gutsy kindness, rare maturity. The ultimate guardrail shows itself to require the kind of life unperturbed by the requirements of overcoming 10,000 years of capitulation. The salt of the earth tends the ground, takes its lumps, listens to the forever wisdom so cleverly forgotten.
Brilliant piece, Mike. One of your best. So succinct. It will provide clarity to future historians.
Response to Mike Brock
Initial note: Before responding, one thing must be said that Brock does not make explicit but is key to understanding the context: liberal democracy has never been a neutral referee serving everyone. It has always been, to a large extent, the benevolent facade of class struggle and capitalist exploitation.
The institutions Brock calls "the Cathedral" (universities, media, administrative state) did not fall from the sky. They were built to serve concentrated interests, but with the added virtue of doing so hypocritically: they promised equality while delivering exploitation, they promised participation while concentrating power.
This does not justify today's fascism, but it explains why the vacuum Brock diagnoses is not an anomaly but the culmination of a long process. The problem is not that liberal democracy became corrupted. The problem is that it was never as pure as some remember.
That said, here is the response.
---
Shared diagnosis: Brock accurately describes the structure of "actual fascism": Yarvin writes the ideology, Thiel funds it, Vance executes it, and podcasters make it digestible. The legitimacy vacuum was created by liberal institutions themselves (Iraq, 2008, the pandemic). And the institutionalists do not react because recognizing the problem would mean admitting their own complicity.
All of this is true. And it is valuable. Very valuable.
What to add to his article: Brock leaves us with an open question: "The window is closing. What you do now is the record." But he does not specify what concrete actions we can take. Here are three directions that complete his diagnosis without contradicting it:
1. Build popular power from below
The "No Kings" movement and the rejection of ICE show that people do not passively accept the "CEO-government." These movements are not just protests: they are grassroots organization that can translate into electoral power and mass civil disobedience. The institutionalists will not lead this, but they can support it.
2. Democratic control of technology
If automation replaces human labor, the benefits must reach everyone, not just the owners of the machines. This means: universal basic income funded by taxes on AI, common ownership of data, platform cooperatives. This is not utopia: real experiments are already underway.
3. Alliance between movements
The "No Kings" movement is national in the US, but the problem is global. Yarvin-Thiel-Vance have allies in Hungary, Italy, Argentina. We need to coordinate international responses: boycotts, popular sanctions, cross-border mutual aid networks.
---
Conclusion
Brock's article is the best diagnosis of the current power structure I have read. His analysis of the connection between ideology, capital, political execution, and cultural legitimization should be required reading.
But it must be read with a caveat in mind: the liberal democracy Brock seems to want to restore was never fully real. This is not about returning to a center that failed. It is about building something new that does not reproduce the contradictions of the past.
Brock gives us the diagnosis. Now it is up to us, with this caveat in mind, to move to action.
At this point, it feels like all commentary on how history will remember this moment should be prefaced with "if enough records of this time survive", or even "if we survive".
Well said.
Thx Mike
"This is why the institutionalists cannot lead the response to this moment."
And, unfortunately, it appears at this time that major voices for "accountability" - Indivisible, No Kings, and even Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, and Heather Cox Richardson - should probably be counted among the institutionalists.
Getting eight million people to march on a Saturday in March was great (I was, unfortunately, kept indoors by my usual debilitating spring allergies). But really, it accomplished nothing. If you're going to get that many people to march, don't just wave banners and stay inside the lines. Block traffic. March on capital buildings and demand action. Organize a general strike. Not the lame one-day May 1st strike Indivisible is pushing, a real strike - one which ends when Trump is removed from power and he and his lackeys face criminal charges.
Meanwhile, Reich and Krugman keep pushing people to "get out the vote in November", as though those elections will occur (possibly not) and be fair (not a chance). They either won't occur, or the Republicans will throw out votes and refuse to seat Democratic winners. I could, for example, see Johnson refusing to seat any California Representatives on the grounds that the redistricting was "illegal", which would definitely put Congress safely in Republican hands, and that's just one of many tactics available to those who have placed themselves above the law.
Yes. I think it is hard to believe in deadlines when the regime always moves the goal post. Those who want to play with them - as it is profitable for them - before the scream NO NO I did mot mean that.
Windows closed
I wrote a note about how the regimes rules for its population are the same a a dystopian childhood.
Sobering.
I highly recommend Diary of a Man in Despair. It is a journal kept by a German intellectual from 1932-1945 and it changed me to read it. If I didn't know better I would have thought it was written about our current times. Like then the capital class and the journalists went along to get what they could out of it and the moderates in power refused to see what was happening. How he describes the general populace and the fever of nationalism was terrifying based on how toxic our discourse is.
Get Vance out of our government. He is a poser and Theil will be speaking for him
Great job, Mike. Coincidentally, or maybe not so coincidentally, John B. Judis has an almost identical take in Persuasion called What Hegel Knew About Trump-different premise, same exact conclusion. And if by some miracle we escape perdition, and this national/international nightmare finally ends, what's left of the American people should destroy every property with the foul name of 'Trump' affixed to it brick by brick, the same way the French people once destroyed the Bastille. Then we will all salt the ground, and pray...